i think it gets short shrift on television because americans in general do not know or care about tennis—especially in comparison to the obsessive and rabid devotion to, in turn, baseball, football, and basketball, and especially now that top american players are thin on the ground and the rivalries (e.g. sampras-agassi) have all dried up. that said, the networks do faithfully air the second weekend (semi-final and final rounds) of the grand slam tournaments (and since 2001, the women's final of the U.S. open has been played and aired live in prime time), and on slow sundays may even pick up another major final (key biscayne, indian wells, etc.); and ESPN/ESPN2 or USA etc. always has coverage of the entire tournament—which, in their defense, is an awful lot of tennis to give over programming time to. so it's there to watch, but i don't think it'll ever get the kind of support the other big three do.

but i will always watch it! and try to rope the people around me into watching it as well! i love it, and i love no player more than roger federer. wallace's essay really is no exaggeration of anything. i'm glad you like a supposedly fun thing! i found some of the essays dense going (e.g. the one on television), but very rewarding. and i adore footnotes. :) i keep meaning to check out his new essays, or his novel infinite jest, but i've yet to manage it.